I will try again , when running parallel outputs (pre-driving two amps in parallel for eg.) system tonality changes, is there away around this ..?
If you're not prepared to experiment, to get more information about the particular scenario, you'll get nowhere - the world doesn't always have an all-knowing mystic or guru around the corner, to spoonfeed one thoroughly comprehensive answers ...Okey dokey , err another way, is there a correct way to connect two amplifiers to a pre, is there a ratio to input imp/drive to avoid ........
Always nice to know that not everyone takes subjective statements about cables as a fact. Now if only more people would embrace DBT or even SBT so they have some sort of scientific basis for their statements. Any cable that alters the frequency, phase, adds distortion or changes the overall decibel level isn't a cable but a defective piece of crap. When will people accept the fact that the only job of a cable is to transfer the signal from point A to point B unaltered? Sorry but if your $2000 cable alters the sound then it's crap.
It is important to note than many of us have heard differences between cables, and we cannot precisely say why these differences exist. I 'reset' to cheap cables, over 20 years ago, and gradually upgraded. There is a difference, but I cannot tell you which cables are truly best. There may be many successful candidates.
Wiring + grounding ==> loop currents, shield currents. In case you do not speak about some exotic valve amp that would distort even at 10k load.
Apart from the contents, how can you get a patent on something that's been in use for ages? If he would do due diligence on prior art, the patent would bloat to 1000 pages at least!
Jan
That happens more often than you'd think. The examiners run a patent keyword search. If it doesn't come up, that's that, the patent can issue- unlike other patent systems, following publication of the application, no external input showing prior art in a non-patent publication is accepted by USPTO examiners. The attitude is, "You can fight it out in court."
I remember one guy getting a patent on an old method of plastics processing and threatening to sue my company- this was despite the 30 years of existence of commercial equipment to do that sort of processing. We sent him some brochures from a manufacturer of that equipment, mentioned frivolous litigation, fraud on the patent office, and sanctions. That stopped the threats pretty quickly. The examiner who passed this was totally unaware of the longstanding commercial existence of the method.
Patents like this one are not only amazingly stupid, they are ineffective since they can't be enforced. Reading the thread linked above where the "inventor" participated, he came across as somewhat mentally unbalanced as well as not terribly bright.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.